Devon Sawa plays a guy who is sitting on the runway,
on his way to Paris for his senior trip, when he has a
disaster vision. Because of his erratic behavior, he and
six others are kicked out of the plane. Lo and behold,
his vision was accurate, and the plane blows up. Well, it turns out that the deathmeister is
just not happy
at being cheated of seven victims. Heck, he's still unhappy about that
chess game in The Seventh Seal. He decides to claim
the victims back, in the same order in which they would have died on the
plane. The challenge for the seven
"survivors" is to determine whether they all doomed, or
whether there
is a way to beat even death itself.

It's a slasher movie,
except that death has cut out the middle man, and just
does his own work. And it's a good slasher movie, made with humor and
imagination. Despite some flaws, Final Destination has genuine
thrills, and is many cuts above the typical offering of
this type. The highlights of the film are the gory deaths, which are
executed with bizarre Rube Goldberg-like chains of action. It's all
enlivened by some very good use of the surprise cut
techniques, some good production values, and some good
performances from the kids.

IMDB
summary: 6.6 out of 10. This is an extraordinarily good score for a
teen-oriented grisly death film.

Box Office Mojo.
It grossed $53 million on a budget in the mid twenties. It
grossed another sixty million overseas.

The meaning of the IMDb
score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of
excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars
from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm
watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars
from the critics. The fives are generally not
worthwhile unless they are really your kind of
material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics,
or a C- from our system.
Films rated below five are generally awful even if you
like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one
and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less,
depending on just how far below five the rating
is.

Our own
guideline:

A means the movie is so good it
will appeal to you even if you hate the genre.

B means the movie is not
good enough to win you over if you hate the
genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an
open mind about this type of film. Any film rated B- or better
is recommended for just about anyone. In order to rate at
least a B-, a film should be both a critical and commercial
success. Exceptions: (1) We will occasionally rate a film B- with
good popular acceptance and bad reviews, if we believe the
critics have severely underrated a film. (2) We may also
assign a B- or better to a well-reviewed film which did not do well at the
box office if we feel that the fault lay in the marketing of
the film, and that the film might have been a hit if people
had known about it. (Like, for example, The Waterdance.)

C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but
will be considered excellent by people who enjoy this kind of
movie. If this is your kind of movie, a C+ and an A are
indistinguishable to you.

C
means it is competent, but uninspired genre fare. People who
like this kind of movie will think it satisfactory. Others
probably will not.

C- indicates that it we found it to
be a poor movie, but genre addicts find it watchable. Any film
rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of
film, but films with this rating should be approached with
caution by mainstream audiences, who may find them incompetent
or repulsive or both. If this is NOT your kind of movie, a C-
and an E are indistinguishable to you.

D means you'll hate it even if you
like the genre. We don't score films below C- that
often, because we like movies and we think that most of them
have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that,
you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.
Films rated below C- generally have both bad reviews and poor
popular acceptance.

E means that you'll hate it even if
you love the genre.

F means that the film is not only unappealing
across-the-board, but technically inept as well.